ArticleExperimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.)2022
Increasing adverse drug events extraction robustness on social media: Case study on negation and speculation.
Article in Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Value of Social Media Analysis for Adverse Events Detection and Pharmacovigilance: Scoping Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Applied artificial intelligence in healthcare: Listening to the winds of change in a post-COVID-19 world.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last decade, an increasing number of users have started reporting adverse drug events (ADEs) on social media platforms, blogs, and health forums. Given the large volume of reports, pharmacovigilance has focused on ways to use natural language processing (NLP) techniques to rapidly examine these large collections of text, detecting mentions of drug-related adverse reactions to trigger medical investigations. However, despite the growing interest in the task and the advances in NLP, the robustness of these models in face of linguistic phenomena such as negations and speculations is an open research question. Negations and speculations are pervasive phenomena in natural language and can severely hamper the ability of an automated system to discriminate between factual and non-factual statements in text. In this article, we take into consideration four state-of-the-art systems for ADE detection on social media texts. We introduce SNAX, a benchmark to test their performance against samples containing negated and speculated ADEs, showing their fragility against these phenomena. We then introduce two possible strategies to increase the robustness of these models, showing that both of them bring significant increases in performance, lowering the number of spurious entities predicted by the models by 60% for negation and 80% for speculations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.